Do you have UAC ON or OFF?

[Berryracer]

this is the first thing I turn off after formatting my Notebook. Many people say that it is best to keep it on as it provides another security layer since you are always running in a standard user mode rather as an Admin.

But the question that comes to my mind is....97% of the users who see a pop-up tellins them yes or no, they will click yes.....they go to some fishy site...then a message saying Java wants to run....yes or no....they will click yes thinking Java is trying to do something whereas it is some fishy worm trying to get access to your system..... so my personal opinion about this is it is useless....

but please correct meh if I'm wrong

 

[Zorander]

Off, but then again I'm not one of those who simply click on the 'Yes' button on a pop-up in the hope of making them go away...

 

[ViRGE]

On for sure. The thought that any process you run is automatically run as an unrestricted admin is terrifying. Doubleplus so when it means any and every application can be used as an exploit vector to admin.

 

[gmaster456]

No reason not to have it on. At least not for me.

 

[Steltek]

On for sure. The thought that any process you run is automatically run as an unrestricted admin is terrifying. Doubleplus so when it means any an every application can be used as an exploit vector to admin.

+1

UAC used to bother me on Windows, especially with how MS went out of their way to make it so very ultra annoying in Vista. However, once I began using Linux and adjusted to dealing with privilege escalation, it wasn't that big a deal with Windows anymore (especially with the UAC improvements MS made in Win7).

The bottom line is that my machines are far safer with it on, so it stays on.

 

[Phynaz]

On for sure. The thought that any process you run is automatically run as an unrestricted admin is terrifying. Doubleplus so when it means any an every application can be used as an exploit vector to admin.

/End of thread.

 

[Dulanic]

On but on a lower setting.

 

[Jaskalas]

On, and unless I've explicitly caused the prompt through my own action I'll likely tell it to ah heck off.

 

[RavenSEAL]

Off.

I keep my machine as clean as a doctor's spatula, so I normally don't worry about BS eating up my info.

 

[Nothinman]

On because disabling it also turns off other important things like file and registry virtualization. I almost never get UAC prompts during normal use so I don't see a reason to turn it off.

 

[SimMike2]

With Vista, I turned it off. With Windows 7, I leave it on.

 

[lxskllr]

+1

UAC used to bother me on Windows, especially with how MS went out of their way to make it so very ultra annoying in Vista. However, once I began using Linux and adjusted to dealing with privilege escalation, it wasn't that big a deal with Windows anymore (especially with the UAC improvements MS made in Win7).

The bottom line is that my machines are far safer with it on, so it stays on.

I'm not really familiar with the way Win7 implements it, but I found it irritating, and non-intuitive in Vista. In GNU/Linux, I can almost always anticipate when when I'll need to escalate my rights. In Vista it was a bit of a mystery, and sometimes very inconvenient.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

On Windows 7 it's very unobtrusive. Why the hell would you turn it off?

 

[Steltek]

I'm not really familiar with the way Win7 implements it, but I found it irritating, and non-intuitive in Vista. In GNU/Linux, I can almost always anticipate when when I'll need to escalate my rights. In Vista it was a bit of a mystery, and sometimes very inconvenient.

In Vista, it seemed like you got UAC alerts for just 'bout everything up to moving your mouse in what Vista thought was the wrong speed/direction. In Win7, the alerts are more closely aligned with the type of events which would require escalation of rights in Linux. My Win7 experience is pretty much in line with what Nothinman said -- very seldom if ever do I see a UAC prompt in Win7 during non-maintenance, normal use (and, when I do, it never fails it occurred because the application I'm running wasn't properly written by the developer).

 

[Berryracer]

So if you have UAC on, when you format your system, and start installing programs, should you right click on each program and choose "Run as administrator" or simply double click it and agree to the UAC prompt?

I mean, when would you do the right click/run as administrator thing?

 

[Lifted]

So if you have UAC on, when you format your system, and start installing programs, should you right click on each program and choose "Run as administrator" or simply double click it and agree to the UAC prompt?

I mean, when would you do the right click/run as administrator thing?

The only time I've seen it required was with some legacy apps that don't work with UAC and for running certain tools/apps/scripts in a CLI. For most regular desktop apps there is no need to 'run as administrator' as the UAC prompt will do that for you if required.

 

[corkyg]

I have it ON in my Win 7 systems. It doesn't exist in my XP Pro system.

 

[zokudu]

There is no real reason to turn it off. Even if you're an advanced user it tells you when something is wrong like a program you don't want asking for admin privileges.

 

[ViRGE]

Just to follow up with what I wrote earlier, while it's true that you can't solve the dancing pigs problem without locking out a user entirely, privilege separation greatly diminishes it. If applications do not regularly request admin, then it throws up a red flag that something may be wrong. And at the very least, it's throwing up a flag instead of blindly running it.

Otherwise the logical extension of this idea are the things MS is doing for Windows on ARM, and what Apple is doing for Mountain Lion. WOA will be a complete walled garden, and you won't have the ability to run applications with admin privileges at all. Meanwhile Mountain Lion's Gatekepper is going to be half-way between a walled garden and UAC; by default it won't run unsigned applications. Both are better solutions to the dancing pigs problem, but they come with significant tradeoffs.

Anyhow, running everything as admin, and doing so without user intervention is such a terrible idea in a modern context that I don't have meaningful words for it. Applications should only have the most basic privileges necessary for them to do their function, otherwise you're one drive-by browser exploit away from having your computer 0wned. For the love of all that's Holy (and as a courtesy to your fellow internet users), please, please don't disable UAC.

 

[Rhonda the Sly]

I'm using the default behavior in Windows 8. It's fast and fairly unobtrusive.

 

[ultimatebob]

It's on, but I turned off the whole "make my screen gray to get my attention" crap off real quick.

It's quite useful if you have a sibling or spouse who has a bad habit of clicking "Yes" on everything, as it also asks for the Administrator password if you're using a non-privileged user account.

 

[Skitzer]

Left it on ... doesn't bother me.

 

[nickbits]

Off. Too annoying.

 

[Herald85]

Off. Too annoying.

Could you give examples?

Only time UAC pops up for me is new software installations and that annoying Java update once every week.

I hated it in Vista too, W7 I think it's executed almost perfectly.

 

[Kelemvor]

On with Win7. Had it off with Vista as it was a pain in the ass.